Dream car or Budget, which comes first? Tell us your thoughts | No thanks

Mazda Bongo MOT Results

Registered in 2003
67.4% pass rate
from 310 tests in 2017
(37% better than other 2003 vans)
Failure rates by item

Here you can drill down into the failure rates for each item on the test. We've also compared the rates to the average results for 2003 vans and highlighted areas where the Mazda Bongo is unusually good or bad.

  • 23% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (27% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 12% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2003 vans)
      • 11% fail on Fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2003 vans)
      • 1.6% fail on Tell tale (9 times worse than other 2003 vans)
      • 0.97% fail on Switch (18 times worse than other 2003 vans)
    • 5.8% fail on Position lamps
      • 4.5% fail on Front lamps
      • 0.97% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.32% fail on All position lamps
    • 3.5% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 3.2% fail on Registration plate lamp (72% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 2.9% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.9% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.9% fail on Stop lamp (74% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 1.3% fail on Battery
    • 0.65% fail on Direction indicators (85% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 0.65% fail on Flashing type (85% better than other 2003 vans)
        • 0.32% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.32% fail on Side repeaters
    • 0.32% fail on Electrical wiring
  • 12% fail on Suspension (54% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 3.9% fail on Suspension arms
      • 3.9% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 3.2% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 2.6% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.97% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 2.6% fail on Prescribed areas (66% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 1.9% fail on Component mounting
      • 0.65% fail on Spring mounting (81% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 2.3% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.97% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.97% fail on Condition
    • 0.32% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.32% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.32% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.32% fail on Rear
  • 6.8% fail on Driver's view of the road (46% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 5.5% fail on Wipers
    • 0.97% fail on Washers (80% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 0.32% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.32% fail on Mirrors
  • 3.5% fail on Brakes (84% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 2.3% fail on Brake performance (82% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 0.97% fail on Front wheels (77% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 0.97% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.32% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.32% fail on Rear wheels
    • 0.65% fail on ABS
    • 0.65% fail on Hub components (79% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 0.65% fail on Brake pads
    • 0.32% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.32% fail on Components
        • 0.32% fail on Pipes
  • 2.6% fail on Steering (65% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 2.6% fail on Steering system (59% better than other 2003 vans)
      • 2.3% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.32% fail on Steering rack
  • 2.6% fail on Tyres (70% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 1.6% fail on Condition
    • 0.97% fail on Tread depth (82% better than other 2003 vans)
  • 1.6% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (77% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 1.3% fail on Doors
      • 0.65% fail on Drivers
      • 0.65% fail on Passengers front
    • 0.32% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 0.32% fail on Chassis
  • 0.65% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions (91% better than other 2003 vans)
    • 0.32% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.32% fail on Emissions
  • 0.65% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.65% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.32% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.32% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.32% fail on Requirements